Quote Originally Posted by Welknair View Post
Example mechanic: Whenever you Weave spells, you must make a Spellcraft Check at DC 13+Total level of spells to be wovenX2. If you fail this check, the Weaving is ruined and the invested magic is wasted.

The Result: You can Weave spells who's levels total your max castable spell level with about a 50% chance of success (Not including Int Modifier), with increased chance of success for Weaving lower level spells. This means that weaving lower level spells is relatively easy, but the more you push things the greater the chance it'll go kaput. As such, constantly trying to use the maximum is likely going to be less efficient than doing something a bit more modest (whether that be not weaving or simply doing an easier weaving). Skill Focus (Spell Craft) suddenly starts lookin' good... You could also say that on a failure instead of losing the entire Weaving, you lose a number of spells in the weaving such that your roll could meet the DC.

Example of this additional mechanic: I was trying to Weave a Fireball, Scorching Ray, and Magic Missile (I'm an Evoker, can you tell?) all at once. This would be a DC 22 check. Let's say that I got only 21. Well... (21-10)/2=5.5. So I start checking what would happen if the lowest spell were removed, then second lowest, etc, always favoring elimination of lower level spells first. In this example, I'd successfully cast the Fireball and Scorching Ray, effectively losing the 1 spell level. Bit off more than I could chew. This addition is somewhat complicated, but means that Weaving isn't an all-or-nothing ordeal. Yet still overextending yourself will be a bad idea. Note: When trying decide between spells of the same level to eliminate, choose randomly.

Note: This is my favorite idea for mitigating your Weaving.

Edit: A simplification of the lose-some-but-not-all variant that reduces bookkeeping would be to simply eliminate lowest level spells until you could have made the check. Or you could say eliminate the highest, actually. This will take less time, but increase the amount of spell levels wasted on a failure.

Hmm. However, this would be a larger value on high Int, making Intelligence Spell Weavers the most common. You could always do what's suggested in the ELH and say that you can substitute Int for whatever your primary casting ability is...
This is a good idea. Still, I'd probably make the Check be 10 or 11 + 2x the total number of spells to be woven, and allow the Spell Weaver's spellcasting score modifier to be added to it. This would make sure that Int-based Spell Weavers didn't have any special advantages.